Summary:During the summer after his college graduation, Art Bechstein tries to break free from his stern father and his web of gangland connections when he meets Jane Bellweather , at tortured beauty, and her boyfriend, Cleveland Arning, a small-time street hood with seductive delusions of grandeur.During the summer after his college graduation, Art Bechstein tries to break free from his stern father and his web of gangland connections when he meets Jane Bellweather , at tortured beauty, and her boyfriend, Cleveland Arning, a small-time street hood with seductive delusions of grandeur. The cast is rounded out by Art’s boss and part-time girlfriend Phlox. (Groundswell Production)…Expand

The full warmth and idiosyncrasy of Chabon's original is missed in an adaptation that feels more impersonally observed. But Lawson's pic, (with the director making a left turn from prior feature "Dodgeball," which he says was a money gig undertaken to hasten this dream project) is entertaining and involving enough on its own terms.

Disappointed fans of Michael Chabon will have to watch "Wonder Boys" for solace, for The Mysteries of Pittsburgh boasts only one core mystery: how one can take such promising material and render it completely unmemorable?

Not sure why this was panned by the critics. Not as good as Wonder Boys, but better than the majority of Hollywood fare. I hadn't seen Not sure why this was panned by the critics. Not as good as Wonder Boys, but better than the majority of Hollywood fare. I hadn't seen Peter Sarsgaard or Sienna Miller in a comedic role before, both I think have further potential in that arena. The main character (Jon Foster), I did not know, and have not seen before, but he did a more than adequate job in this film as well. This has not been a great season for DVD's IMO, so this is a good rental among the limited selections for the summer of 2009.…Expand

For the purpose of condensing the novel, I can understand why some of the choices are made. However, removing Arthur and consolidating himFor the purpose of condensing the novel, I can understand why some of the choices are made. However, removing Arthur and consolidating him with Cleveland was questionable. Having read the book, it made me fairly uncomfortable, but somehow the ending came to practically the same conclusion minus perhaps a bit of emotion.…Expand

Nicely acted, but the movie is just fair. It's well enough done, it has a polished and professional look to it. The story just Nicely acted, but the movie is just fair. It's well enough done, it has a polished and professional look to it. The story just didn't always hold my interest. Nice cinematography.…Expand

Missed the tone of the novel completely, distorting characters relationships, motivations and even sexual orientations. Did Thurber even read Missed the tone of the novel completely, distorting characters relationships, motivations and even sexual orientations. Did Thurber even read the novel? Or just the dust jacket? A hatchet job.…Expand

Director Thurber and lead Foster really had to work overtime to mess this one up so badly. I can't believe Chabon consented to this Director Thurber and lead Foster really had to work overtime to mess this one up so badly. I can't believe Chabon consented to this script. The second most important character in the novel (Arthur Lecompte) was cut entirely, which through the remaining storyline and characters off completely. What remains is a well shot and poorly acted cliche, with the exception of Sarsgaard's work. Blah. The real tragedy is not that I wasted my time and money on this, but that I'll never be able to see one of my favorite novels adapted into the fine film it was destined to be. Thurber should stick to what he does best-- Dodgeball II, anyone?…Expand